The Court dismissed a contempt petition alleging willful disobedience of an order dated 18.04.2016. The Court found the case utterly misconceived as the complained incident occurred prior to the impugned order and no contumacious act was established.
Petition dismissed; no order as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR CONTEMPT PETITION NO.1219 OF 2016
O R D E R
This contempt case was filed alleging willful disobedience to the order dated 18.04.2016 passed by this Court in W.P.No.62 of 2016. By the said order, this Court took note of the fact that in so far as the police authorities were concerned, their counter-affidavit indicated that they had no interest in interfering with the civil litigation between the parties and further directed that in the event any criminal case was registered owing to the said dispute, the police authorities should strictly follow the due procedure laid down by law while investigating the same and taking appropriate action thereafter.
Perusal of the affidavit filed in support of the contempt case reflects that the complaint therein is with regard to an incident which occurred on 16.11.2015 long prior to the passing of the order by this Court. There is no other allegation in the affidavit as to any contumacious act on the part of the respondents.
The contempt case is utterly misconceived and is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs.
SANJAY KUMAR, J
2nd SEPTEMBER, 2016
Svv
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the allegations of willful disobedience to the earlier civil order are substantiated by the facts on record.
Sanjay Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
